What the documents look like
Multi-warehouse order routing decides which warehouse ships an order, and it happens before carrier handover. The working data comes from WMS, OMS, ERP inventory and platform inventory interfaces, with update frequencies given as daily or hourly. In store service and internal training, supply chain planning, WMS administrators and e-commerce operations handle warehouse routing rules, inventory synchronization tables, transfer orders and stockout alerts, and they must trace citations back to their sources.
The field definitions, version status and authorization boundaries of these documents determine whether a citation in training material can be checked. A retrieval step outputs a citation array whose length may be zero; an empty array does not mean the workflow has errored and stopped. Training explanations need to separate this behavior from the business authorization state of any transfer or routing action.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
A knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model; knowledge bases with different vector models cannot be associated together. The minimum relevance value is a filter threshold and takes effect only in semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used; it does not perform permission or entity isolation. RRF is the fusion process for mixed retrieval results, not a standalone switch that can be turned on. Image retrieval requires corresponding image input and model capability, and reranking requires a reranking model enabled according to settings. Optional paths shown in the overall document flow diagram do not mean every request executes all of them. When store training cites warehouse routing rules or inventory synchronization tables, the answer and the cited source text must be checked line by line; reasoning process or fluent wording does not replace source evidence.
Hypothetical drill sample: a store training document cites a warehouse routing rules document whose source text reads "East China region orders ship preferentially from the Shanghai warehouse; when Shanghai warehouse sellable inventory is below the safety stock, route to the Nanjing warehouse." The draft sentence is "East China region orders all ship from the Shanghai warehouse." The draft sentence and the source text hold mutually exclusive values for the shipping warehouse field, which is a same-field contradiction. Another document, a transfer order, has source text "The transfer request has been submitted, status is pending review." The draft sentence is "The transfer has been executed." Pending review does not demonstrate execution, and the draft sentence is unsupported. These materials are hypothetical text and point to no real entity.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below lists documented settings or implementation check items relevant to this page's function, built around the hypothetical sample. The values are starting points for this hypothetical trial, used for comparison, and are not official defaults.
| Configuration or check item | Hypothetical starting point for this trial | Reason for the choice and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Associate only warehouse routing rule bases with the same vector model | Different vector models cannot be associated together; check identifiers first and exclude non-matching ones |
| Search mode | Mixed retrieval | Exact terms such as codes and warehouse names need full-text recall as a supplement |
| Minimum relevance | Starting point set to 0.3 | A trial value only; compare against retrieval results item by item and adjust |
| Citation limit | Controlled by tokens | The document uses tokens as the citation limit unit, not top k |
| Result reranking | Enabled according to settings | Requires a reranking model; when not enabled, no reranking comparison is made |
| Citation output handoff | Check whether the citation array is passed to the answer step | An empty array length of zero is allowed; check the answer against cited source text item by item |
Three common errors
- Writing a pending-review status as executed. The input is the transfer order source text "status is pending review," the comparison object is the draft sentence "the transfer has been executed," and the observable result is that the status fields disagree, so the draft sentence is unsupported.
- Writing mutually exclusive values as "all." The input is the warehouse routing rules source text "when below safety stock, route to the Nanjing warehouse," the comparison object is the draft sentence "all ship from the Shanghai warehouse," and the observable result is that the shipping warehouse values are mutually exclusive, which is a contradiction.
- Treating retrieval results as an authorization credential. The input is the citation array output by the search node, the comparison object is the training material statement "transfer already authorized," and the observable result is that the cited content contains no authorization field, so the statement lacks evidence.
How to verify the setup
- Input the warehouse routing rules source text from the hypothetical sample and the draft sentence "East China region orders all ship from the Shanghai warehouse," compare the shipping warehouse values in both, and observe whether mutually exclusive values appear; their appearance is judged a contradiction.
- Input the transfer order source text "status is pending review" from the hypothetical sample and the draft sentence "the transfer has been executed," compare the status fields, and observe whether they agree; disagreement is judged unsupported.
- Input a paper citation array
[], compare whether the downstream answer step can still proceed, and observe whether the chain breaks because of the empty array; this check does not claim that a fictional rule retrieval will necessarily return an empty array.